D-1513N vs Celeron E3200
Primary details
Comparing Celeron E3200 and D-1513N processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | 2853 | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.88 | no data |
Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
Series | no data | Intel Xeon D |
Power efficiency | 0.77 | no data |
Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
Release date | 30 August 2009 (15 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $52 | $192 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron E3200 and D-1513N basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
Threads | 2 | 8 |
Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
Multiplier | no data | 16 |
L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 256 KB |
L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 1 MB |
L3 cache | 0 KB | 6 MB |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
Die size | 82 mm2 | 246.24 mm2 |
Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | no data |
Number of transistors | 228 million | 3200 Million |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E3200 and D-1513N compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
Socket | LGA775 | no data |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3200 and D-1513N. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
AES-NI | - | + |
AVX | - | + |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
TSX | - | + |
Idle States | + | no data |
Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron E3200 and D-1513N technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
TXT | - | + |
EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E3200 and D-1513N are enumerated here.
VT-d | - | + |
VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3200 and D-1513N. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 29.861 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3200 and D-1513N.
PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
Threads | 2 | 8 |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
D-1513N has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron E3200 and D-1513N. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron E3200 is a desktop processor while D-1513N is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3200 and D-1513N, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.